From: Scott Wood <scottwood@freescale.com>
To: Caraman Mihai Claudiu-B02008 <B02008@freescale.com>
Cc: Wood Scott-B07421 <B07421@freescale.com>,
"linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org" <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>,
"kvm@vger.kernel.org" <kvm@vger.kernel.org>,
"kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org" <kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 2/6] KVM: PPC: Book3E: Refactor SPE_FP exit handling
Date: Wed, 5 Jun 2013 14:07:34 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1370459254.26139.7@snotra> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <300B73AA675FCE4A93EB4FC1D42459FF44EBF7@039-SN2MPN1-011.039d.mgd.msft.net> (from B02008@freescale.com on Wed Jun 5 02:29:47 2013)
On 06/05/2013 02:29:47 AM, Caraman Mihai Claudiu-B02008 wrote:
> > > case BOOKE_INTERRUPT_SPE_FP_ROUND:
> > > +#ifdef CONFIG_SPE
> > > kvmppc_booke_queue_irqprio(vcpu,
> > > BOOKE_IRQPRIO_SPE_FP_ROUND);
> > > r =3D RESUME_GUEST;
> > > break;
> >
> > Why not use kvmppc_supports_spe() here, for consistency?
>=20
> I added cpu_has_feature(CPU_FTR_SPE) for the case specified above, =20
> but here
> SPE_FP_ROUND is not shared with ALTIVEC. CONFIG_SPE is used in other =20
> places
> in KVM without this check, shouldn't be all or nothing?
I'd rather it be consistent, at least between handling one exception =20
and another.
-Scott=
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-06-05 19:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-06-03 20:54 [RFC PATCH 0/6] KVM: PPC: Book3E: AltiVec support Mihai Caraman
2013-06-03 20:54 ` [RFC PATCH 1/6] KVM: PPC: Book3E: Fix AltiVec interrupt numbers and build breakage Mihai Caraman
2013-06-03 20:54 ` [RFC PATCH 2/6] KVM: PPC: Book3E: Refactor SPE_FP exit handling Mihai Caraman
2013-06-04 22:14 ` Scott Wood
2013-06-05 7:29 ` Caraman Mihai Claudiu-B02008
2013-06-05 19:07 ` Scott Wood [this message]
2013-06-03 20:54 ` [RFC PATCH 3/6] KVM: PPC: Book3E: Rename IRQPRIO names to accommodate ALTIVEC Mihai Caraman
2013-06-04 22:28 ` Scott Wood
2013-06-05 7:52 ` Caraman Mihai Claudiu-B02008
2013-06-03 20:54 ` [RFC PATCH 4/6] KVM: PPC: Book3E: Add AltiVec support Mihai Caraman
2013-06-04 22:36 ` Scott Wood
2013-06-05 9:23 ` Caraman Mihai Claudiu-B02008
2013-06-03 20:54 ` [RFC PATCH 5/6] KVM: PPC: Book3E: Add ONE_REG " Mihai Caraman
2013-06-04 22:40 ` Scott Wood
2013-07-03 12:11 ` Caraman Mihai Claudiu-B02008
2013-07-03 18:31 ` Scott Wood
2013-06-03 20:54 ` [RFC PATCH 6/6] KVM: PPC: Book3E: Enhance FPU laziness Mihai Caraman
2013-06-04 22:53 ` Scott Wood
2013-06-05 9:14 ` Caraman Mihai Claudiu-B02008
2013-06-05 20:59 ` Scott Wood
2013-06-04 21:39 ` [RFC PATCH 0/6] KVM: PPC: Book3E: AltiVec support Scott Wood
2013-06-05 7:10 ` Caraman Mihai Claudiu-B02008
2013-06-05 16:35 ` Scott Wood
2013-06-06 9:42 ` Caraman Mihai Claudiu-B02008
2013-06-06 19:57 ` Scott Wood
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1370459254.26139.7@snotra \
--to=scottwood@freescale.com \
--cc=B02008@freescale.com \
--cc=B07421@freescale.com \
--cc=kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).